I’m gonna press X to doubt on that given that the only thing you have been able to bring up was issue 124-26 and not say darkwing and night city or powerplex or even dinosaurus. All better examples of satire which aren't out of whack with the rest of the series like mark going back in time for a couple of issues.
Last edited by Lorgar Aurelian; 2021-04-26 at 05:30 PM.
I mean I gave you three examples of actual satire in the series aimed towards batman the hulk and general “you killed my family” revenge guys who are common in comics.
You refuse to give any examples other then the one two issue story line which is nothing like the rest of the series and feels like you just pulled up by googling “satire in invincible” and then expect every one to just take your word for it.
Last edited by Lorgar Aurelian; 2021-04-26 at 05:44 PM.
Satire certainly exists within Invincible but it would be false to claim that Invincible as a whole is satire.
Having a few points of satire doesn’t make the whole series satirical dude that’s not how any thing works.
Like do you see every thing in a binary? There’s one point of satire so a whole series is satirical even if your not capable of pointing out any other instances of it?
I also don’t know if your desperately falling apart and looking for a gotcha but I already posted this.Yeah, remember when you claimed it’s not satire because it plays em straight? Nifty.
No none of the characters I mentioned are satirical take's on other properties but they all have satirical moments, here ill explain as you haven't read the comics.
Darkwing has a satirical moment when he fights invincible but other wise is not a satirical take on batman
Powerplex is a satirical take on "you killed my father prepare to die" but is not a satirical take on any other super hero.
dinosaurus has two satirical moment's with his human form needing to feel indifferent to transform instead of angry but is not a satirical take on the hulk.
Whether they are caricatures or not is debatable, some very clearly are and some very clearly aren't. Omni-man has some similarities to Superman, and it's clearly intended that the viewer/reader make connections between the two, but he isn't a caricature of Superman. To me the tone of the series and the comic is too earnest and serious to really be classified as satire. There are satirical moments for sure, but that doesn't mean the whole work should be classified as satire.
The intentions behind satire are always serious, but the tone should be explicitly humorous. Invincible has a sense of humor but personally I can't classify it as a comedy. The Boys is a different thing, I think it is trying to be a satire but falls a little flat because of the way Ennis puts the Punisher/Billy up on a pedestal.
so you really had nothing to point to for it being satire then, can't say I'm surprised given that you've done nothing but try and dodge commuting to any actual examples.
no most of the characters aren't caricatures like Aquarus most are like rex splode who take's powers from gambit but obviously isn't a caricature.
Here's a basic definition of satire:
Here's a more involved explanation of satire: https://www.masterclass.com/articles...ypes-of-satirethe use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
You're saying the tone should not be explicitly humorous? Because it looks like Horatian, Juvenalian, and Menippean satire all involve a humorous tone. The examples they give are explicitly humorous, and all exaggerated well beyond what is done in Invincible. You say humor isn't inherent to satire but that's not what every definition I can find says. I'm not an expert by any means, I had never heard of those types of satire before looking them up today, so maybe you are - if so, could you explain a bit more clearly what satire means to you?
Like okay, Invincible has obviously copied many elements of the Marvel and DC universes, but I'm not really seeing an overall critique of those two settings. In some cases it copies them very directly, in some cases it uses them as a starting point to tell more complex or real-feeling stories, and in many cases it just does its own thing. I'm not seeing a larger social commentary, or rather I'm not seeing the copies of those other works fit into a larger social commentary. It generally respects the consequences of actions and I think is trying to make some points on that subject, but that's not really a critique of DC or Marvel.